Loco traction up incline - possible solutions

[ITG]

Hi,

first, let me say, I realise the best answer is not to have an incline in the first place! But, I have now and I will have in the future. Glutton for punishment!

Seriously, on my first layout as a returner with 00 gauge DCC, I’ve learnt so much by making mistakes, and I now feel ready to ditch and start all over again. Lots of reasons for that, not least baseboard issues.

Currently, I have a 3%  incline with curves up to a terminus station. Generally, my Bachmann diesels are ok up it with 3-4 coaches (all I want due to platform size etc), but the Bachman steam generally aren’t. (Most of my locos are Bachman)

I installed DCC Concepts Powerbase strips, and the associated magnets on a 4-6-0 Patriot, but as it stands, that didn’t have the desired effect. I’m pretty sure it’s because the magnets mounted on the underside of the loco are just too high - they need a spacer between chassis and magnet mounting bracket. There is space, but I’m concerned about clearance of electronic uncoupler ramps elsewhere on layout.

 

Now,  going forward on new layout (just waiting for modular baseboards to arrive), the gradient will be less at just 2%, and I will also be able to ease the tightness of the curves. I have also just ordered some Liquid Gravity weights, although haven’t yet explored how/where to mount in each loco.

so, things I could do with feedback upon are:

1. Experience of using DCC Powerbase with 2% gradient, or other

2. have locos generally needed spacers for the magnets, and were there any clearance problems? Or do they fit at right level generally? (Am I unlucky with the Patriot dimensions?)

3. how easy is it to fit/site, and what impact does it have, if using Liquid Gravity (or other weights).

thanks in advance

Ian

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Well positioned weight will augment the force the magnets exert.

 

For best magnetic coupling you want the magnet as close to the 'powerbase' as possible. Really want the powerbase on top of the sleepers...

 

On awkward wheel arrangements, the likes of 4-4-0, 0-4-2, 0-4-4, where getting the force as close to the centre of the coupled wheelbase as possible is essential for the best effect, you could position the magnets to balance added weight when on the gradient with the powerbase, for optimum traction enhancement.

[ITG]

34B - D,

Interesting you say about Powerbase on top of sleepers, because a fair run of my gradient will be on hidden track,  so appearance wouldn’t matter. For that matter, I guess one could ballast on top of the metal Powerbase to hide it on exposed track.

[The Johnster]

Probably teaching granny to suck eggs. but, when you say your gradients are 2% and 3%, are they this grade all the way up/down?  The reason I ask is because it is quite easy to establish the gradient as an average value by measuring the distance from the bottom to the top and the height achieved.  But this may not take into account the vertical transition curves at the bottom and top, which should be fairly gentle as the locos are rigid framed RTR.  These gentle transitions will eat into your gradient's length but not the height, so the actual gradient in the centre section might be considerably steeper than the end-to-end figure suggests!

 

The rigid RTR steam locos are going to run into another problem if the gradient is curved.  It is very difficult to lay track in such a situation, more so as the radius decreases, without introducing a twist that will lift one set of driving wheels off the rail, which is no good either for traction or for electrical pickup.  My advice is to avoid gradients unless you've got twice the room you think you need for them, avoid them on all but the largest radius curves, and keep turnouts well away from them, at least the length of your longest loco or coach.  This is not what you want to hear if you are using multilevel track plans to maximise the use of a limited space!

 

Bachmann locos are known to be questionable haulers, but the situation will improve as the locos run in.  The plating on the driving wheel tyres is very smooth and will roughen up at a microscopic level in time, providing better grip.  In the meantime, give them all the help you can.  Pack as much ballast weight as you can above the driving wheels, check that there is no binding or friction anywhere in the mech or the motion, and get rid of the awful coloured grease so called lubricant that the models come with.  This is used to satisfy shipping fire regulations and insurance.  It stiffens over time and becomes the opposite of a lubricant; it will eventually seize up completely.  It can be cleaned off with a rattlecan electronic switch cleaner spray and cotton buds (for your important little places); leave the loco for a few hours or overnight for this to evaporate off, and re-lube with a suitable non-mineral machine grade oil.  Make sure that the keeper plate retaining screws are not too tight and the axleway channels in the chassis block are clean, and adjust the pickups so that they are exerting the least possible pressure on the back of the wheels while maintaining reliably contact over the full range of that wheelset's sideplay. 

 

This will improve performance all round, and enable you loco to develop the best tractive effort for the gradients.  If the gradient is out of sight, it might be an advantage to roughen the rail head surface a bit, but you will need to employ a more rigorous track cleaning regime in what is probably an awkward location, especially on curved track where arcing as the wheels lift off the rail will leave hard carbon deposits.  In extreme cases, add a tender drive.  

 

Liquid Gravity is good stuff, and so it should be at that price!  You'll need to seal it in with something, but don't use PVA (poly vinyl acetate) in restricted spaces like boilers or smokeboxs, as acetate reacts with the lead to expand; it will eventually swell and break your boiler open from the inside like ice in a pipe.  Non acetate glues should be fine, or you can use Blu-Tac or Milliput.  Check your rolling stock as well for free running and back to backs, and investigate to see if any of it can be lightened.  There is a limit to how much you can do this without affecting the running stability, though.  

 

In the case of tender locos like your Patriot, check the loco-tender coupling.  It may be that the coupling is lifting the rear of the loco a little, or the opposite, that the front end of the coupled wheelbase is lifting because the tender coupling is not supporting the rear.  Also, have a look at the front bogie or pony in case it is strongly enough sprung to lift the front coupled wheels; if it is, trim the length and smooth down the rough end of the spring.  If the layout's location is dry, consider using steel rails which will become magnetised with the powerbase, providing further grip 'Magnadhesion' style.

 

And, of course, take great care when laying track that each piece is smoothly joined to it's neighbour, especially in the vertical transitions and anywhere near turnouts.  On curved sections of gradient, check as much as you can for transverse level with a spirit level; the inside rail will try to force itself out of position because the distance is not just the less circumference as compared with the outside rail, the vertical distance is less as well and all sorts of stresses are induced.  It is the same sort of thing as the very steep gradient on the inside of a hairpin bend on a mountain road, but more difficult to measure and hence to control.

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by The Johnster

[ITG]

Thank you, The Johnster . A well thought through explanation of the factors to consider. I’m just wondering whether you have any advice as to how best to achieve a smooth transition at start and end of incline. I will be using the Woodland Scenics 2% foam incline, set upon 9mm ply lower baseboard. (Courtesy of White Rose Baseboards)  I can see that it would be all too easy to end up with level and then suddenly into the start of the 2%. How’s best to get that upward curved transition? And similarly the curve transition at the top as it flattens out?

Ian

[John ks]

Here is a couple of ways to get a vertical transition

The longer the transition the better, I would think 600mm should be ok

The transitions in the drawings are exaggerated 

 

 

 

 

John

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Ply is your friend for smooth transitions; it does it automatically if the trackbed is fixed at the level point and the other end then moved tangent to the desired gradient. On straight track with current RTR, by experiment I determined that 400mm is the minimum for a completely reliable transition from level to a 2%, and I would favour the 600mm already suggested. If on a curve, add another 50% to the length, because as already described there is inevitably a twist or 'wind' on the track.

 

And keep in mind these are general guidelines, your own workmanship standard is an uncontrolled determinant of what is achievable.

[kevinlms]

20 hours ago, ITG said:

 

I installed DCC Concepts Powerbase strips, and the associated magnets on a 4-6-0 Patriot, but as it stands, that didn’t have the desired effect. I’m pretty sure it’s because the magnets mounted on the underside of the loco are just too high - they need a spacer between chassis and magnet mounting bracket. There is space, but I’m concerned about clearance of electronic uncoupler ramps elsewhere on layout.

 

 

Ian

As long as the magnets don't project below rail level, why should this be a problem?

 

I'll admit to not having used the Powerbase system, so perhaps I'm missing something?

[PMP]

If using the Woodland Scenics gradient sets, make sure you use the incline/decline starter sets, they do all the transitions for you. Follow the instructions, they’re simple, effective, and work. The image shows the transition from level to 2%, over 24 inches it rises 1/2 inch. You can then continue, or vary the gradient using their system elements. The design allows you to build level curves down to around 2nd radius in OO/ho if I recall the minima correctly, and anyone using it in N can go tighter still. The WS product is designed to work with their underlay foam system, which is very good but that can easily be replaced with 1/8th 1/16th cork for example. What track are you using? That will have an impact on the efficiency of the Dcc magnet system.

 

It’s a while since I spoke to Dcc re their system, possibly five years or more so this is from memory. The loco elements are ideally set at around 1mm above rail height. This means you may have to pack the base plate underneath the chassis to get the optimum level. You may have to remove cosmetic brake gear, and any loco with a final drive gear protruding below the chassis may obstruct the base plate. The base plate then needs to be adapted to clear the gearing. It rings a bell that ideally the system should be used on a rail height less than code100 to give best results, DCC do have a useful product support back up so well worth contacting them for the right advice. Their tests gave pretty good results with twenty to thirty wagon trains, if again my memory is working.

Regarding correct advice, it’s worth noting that the ‘information’ referring to chassis lubricant being there for fire and insurance purposes is entirely untrue.

 

Edited May 23, 2020 by PMP
Add pic

[ITG]

It’s Peco code 100 streamline current version.

I’ve now discovered DCC concepts do a pack of varying height mounting brackets for the magnets so have ordered some to see how I fare.
 

Am I right in thinking the WS Incline packs for a 4” climb at 2% include the start and finish components mentioned.

 

The feedback and ideas from all are most welcome.

[The Johnster]

2 hours ago, PMP said:

 

Regarding correct advice, it’s worth noting that the ‘information’ referring to chassis lubricant being there for fire and insurance purposes is entirely untrue.

My local dealer is wrong about it, then.  Any idea what the real reason for this stuff. which is hopelessly ineffective, picks up crud, and fails over time in a completely unpredictable way, is used, just out of interest as the first thing I always do with it it get rid of it asap? 

[PMP]

He most certainly is incorrect.
 

Ask him to apply some thought to it. Our toy trains are supplied from the factory inside flammable cardboard cartons. Inside those cartons are boxes which can be covered in flammable tissue paper or plastic polythene type bags, or just the models box. The model box is made from a flammable card, and the model depending on manufacturers are held in flammable foam or vac form plastic. The model, made from varying degrees of a flammable plastic encases the motor and gear train where this small quantity of lubricant resides. So, to get to this ‘substance’ placed there for Fire and insurance regulations, you’ve got to have a pretty good fire or heat event going for it to be a source of any concern. if it were such a risk then it wouldn’t be shipped in flammable cartons and packaging. As these are toys it seems remarkable that the UK would allow such a highly dangerous substance to be included In a toy. 
 

This substance is a lubricant. 

[kevinlms]

21 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

My local dealer is wrong about it, then.  Any idea what the real reason for this stuff. which is hopelessly ineffective, picks up crud, and fails over time in a completely unpredictable way, is used, just out of interest as the first thing I always do with it it get rid of it asap? 

It's probably the cheapest 'lubricant' the factory can find!

[PMP]

1 hour ago, ITG said:

 

Am I right in thinking the WS Incline packs for a 4” climb at 2% include the start and finish components mentioned.

 

The 2% incline set cover from 0-4 inches in 16ft in 8 pieces. If you use starter packs then you need to continue the gradient using the appropriate ‘riser’ from the WS range.

[The Johnster]

23 minutes ago, PMP said:

He most certainly is incorrect.
 

Ask him to apply some thought to it. Our toy trains are supplied from the factory inside flammable cardboard cartons. Inside those cartons are boxes which can be covered in flammable tissue paper or plastic polythene type bags, or just the models box. The model box is made from a flammable card, and the model depending on manufacturers are held in flammable foam or vac form plastic. The model, made from varying degrees of a flammable plastic encases the motor and gear train where this small quantity of lubricant resides. So, to get to this ‘substance’ placed there for Fire and insurance regulations, you’ve got to have a pretty good fire or heat event going for it to be a source of any concern. if it were such a risk then it wouldn’t be shipped in flammable cartons and packaging. As these are toys it seems remarkable that the UK would allow such a highly dangerous substance to be included In a toy. 
 

This substance is a lubricant. 

Well, that makes sense when you think about it, but I would describe the substance as a temporary lubricant at best.  It will solidify eventually irrespective of storage or usage environments, and pick up crud in the meantime even on rigorously cleaned layouts.  IMHO it is not fit for purpose except as a short term measure.

[DCB]

It is important to measure the gradient relative to horizontal not to a baseboard.  Its easy for the nominally level baseboard to be at 1 in 100 which really messes up the gradient. House floor are often well out of level and sheds can move depending on all sorts of things, I jack ours up with a car jack and add packing when it sinks. Use a spirit level and turn it end for end and split the difference in measurements as they too can be 1 or 2% out.

Easing the gradient around curves can help but with modern flanges some stock can't get round sharp curves on a 3% gradient. We have some long wheelbase Lima 4 wheel CCTs with huge flanges which can't get round 3rd radius on a 3% grade, locos run with only 3 wheel treads on the rails just the flange keeping them on but they grip better on the curve than the straight

 

3 to 4 coaches is a bit light for box standard Bachmann steam on a 3% . I did a video of Tornado slipping to a stand on a 1 in 36 ish, just under 3%  with 4 or 5 Mk1s . while a Triang Britannia passed it pulling about 11 Mk1s  Magnadhesion and steel track making the difference. but the std 4MT  4-6-0 manages around 5.  Taking out or shortening the bogie spring helps Bachmann but  there isn't much space for weight.  I manage to get Hornby 4-6-0s to pull 6 Mk1s  up the 1 in 36 but I need to remove as much   weight as possible from the tenders and strip out the tender pickups, the drag of these alone  equal two coaches.

My older Triang Hornby 4-6-0s re wheeled so no magnadhesion are all capable of hauling 7 Hornby or Lima Mk1s or 7 Bachmann Colletts  up the 1 in 36, but I have a couple of bankers on standby in case they don't.

I have wondered about using super neo magnets and steel track rather than powerbase, mainly because I have steel track and can't be a*******ed to relay it.  Maybe I'll have a play next time I fettle a loco.

 Steel is a bit hard to source but its still out there second hand if you don't mind code 100.

Edited May 25, 2020 by DavidCBroad

[newbryford]

7 hours ago, The Johnster said:

Well, that makes sense when you think about it, but I would describe the substance as a temporary lubricant at best.  It will solidify eventually irrespective of storage or usage environments, and pick up crud in the meantime even on rigorously cleaned layouts.  IMHO it is not fit for purpose except as a short term measure.

 

 i can't say I've ever had any grease solidify on a Bachmann loco.

But I have often removed enough from that would help keep this guy's expenditure on grease to a minimum.....

 

 

[The Johnster]

I've had it completely solidified on an allegedly NIB 56xx off 'Bay, current tooling, and gunged up with crud on other s/h Bachmanns.  An s/h Hornby 2721 was also solid, and the previous owner had tried to lubricate his way out of the situation, so it was heavily gunged as well.  I reserve my view that the stuff is fundamentally not fit for purpose.

 

It's not even any good for naked greased up deaf guy, if it goes hard on him.  Sorry, perhaps I should rethink that last comment...

[tomparryharry]

I know this might be a bit daft, but locomotives don't like going uphill, either! That's why you'll see a banker or pilot locomotive on the job. At least, that's my experience. Some people do themselves a great disservice to their models, saying "It'll only do xxx wagons" Whereas, in real life, they'll only do half of that. Have a look at your local appendices; they will tell you what a locomotive is expected to do.  

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

1 minute ago, tomparryharry said:

...Some people do themselves a great disservice to their models, saying "It'll only do xxx wagons" Whereas, in real life, they'll only do half of that. Have a look at your local appendices; they will tell you what a locomotive is expected to do.  

And for those that enjoy operation, it's a fun aspect needing a loco of adequate rating for the train load and speed; and if such is not available, adding an adequate pilot engine is actually necessary to operate the train.

[Wheatley]

You can't lower the magnets down to the sleeper tops, anything below rail height will come to grief on the first pair of points. But on the hidden bits you can raise the steel nearer the magnets.

 

I did some trials last year as I need a Hornby Clan to lift 9 coaches up a 1 in 60 gradient; initially I found the same as you, but replacing the powerbase plates with 1.5mm piano wire mounted on top of the sleepers made a huge difference. For corners use thick garden wire (not the aluminum stuff obvs !) rather than piano wire. Two magnets on the Clan between the wheelsets without the gear hump,  I evo-sticked them directly to the keeper plate but they could do with being dropped down as PMP says. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Wheatley

[DCB]

7 hours ago, tomparryharry said:

I know this might be a bit daft, but locomotives don't like going uphill, either! That's why you'll see a banker or pilot locomotive on the job. At least, that's my experience. Some people do themselves a great disservice to their models, saying "It'll only do xxx wagons" Whereas, in real life, they'll only do half of that. Have a look at your local appendices; they will tell you what a locomotive is expected to do.  

The trouble is the model performance  up hill falls woefully short of scale length trains. 12 coaches up a 1 in 60 with a 4-6-0 ot Pacific was not unusual, north of Manchester and 12 up a 1 in 36 for a 4-6-0 not unusual West of Newton Abbott.

[tomparryharry]

Hello David, good point. Remember though, freight traffic was-is, a different proposition. Witness banking locos over Shap, and prairies in the West country.

 

[Sol]

For Powerbase capability